Member's Off-site Blogs

an artful-dodger's victory by a landslide predicted by a predictable media...

UK Prime Minister and Conservative party leader Boris Johnson presented the Tory manifesto on 24 November ahead of a snap general election in the country, outlining Brexit plans and making pledges on other issues troubling the country.

As Britain is gearing up for a 12 December general election in a showdown over Brexit, UK newspapers have been offering their verdicts on the Conservative Party's newly-launched manifesto, unveiled by Prime Minister Boris Johnson on 24 November in Shropshire.

With most newspapers supporting Boris's crap, bullshit and fantasies, it's a shoe in... England will need a big spittoon or a massive chunder bowl, for cleansing its lost intestines gone to an artful dodger...

This election cycle has seen an unprecedented number of announcements from all parties on renewable energy, reforestation, and other items generally reserved for only the greenest on the political spectrum. So much so that some are calling this the ‘climate election’.

But elections are expensive things, and politicians rarely turn down a cheque. So if climate change really is going to be a vote decider, it makes sense to take a look at who is funding our politicians. In particular, where have those known to support climate science denial campaigns in the UK put their cash?

DeSmog has analysed donations registered on The Electoral Commission database and found that — by a very long distance — supporters of climate science denial have donated predominantly to the Conservative Party and Tory politicians.

94% of the cash from the 181 donations we uncovered went to the Conservatives — over £5 million in total. £245,657 of this went to Conservative MPs (some of whom have since stood down).

The next highest recipient was Vote Leave, with £325,000 of registered donations. The Liberal Democrats received one donation of £2,000 in 2011. Labour received no donations from these sources.

The BBC has claimed it made a “mistake” in editing a clip where it cut out an audience laughing at Boris Johnson, insisting the decision was made due to time constraints rather than political bias.

In the Question Time leaders’ debate special, broadcast on BBC One on Friday night, an audience member asked the prime minister: “How important is it for someone in your position of power to always tell the truth?”

Her question to Johnson was met with laughter, followed by applause, with Johnson struggling to reply. But in the version shown on the following day’s lunchtime news bulletin the laughter had been removed, with the BBC initially saying the edit had been made for time reasons before it rowed back and admitted its error.

In a sign of the changing power dynamics between the BBC and its viewers during this election, viral online videos claiming to highlight aspects of BBC bias are increasingly reaching larger audiences than the original programmes.

The original Weekend News bulletin attracted just 1.6m viewers across both BBC One and the BBC news channel on Saturday, fewer than the number who have watched Facebook and Twitter clips highlighting the BBC’s decision to edit out the laughter.

Although social media views are calculated using a different methodology to television ratings, it is highly likely that substantially more people have seen coverage of the controversial edit than ever saw the original news bulletin – especially when combined with widespread news coverage of the edited footage.

In place of the prime minister, Channel 4 placed an ice sculpture, representing, they said, the emergency on planet Earth. A second ice sculpture took the place of Brexit party leader Nigel Farage, who also refused to take part.

The Conservatives accused the broadcaster of bias for not allowing Michael Gove to take Johnson’s place, accusing them of “conspiring” with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn to block the party from making their case.

Gove had turned up to the studios but was turned away by Channel 4 who said the debate was for party leaders only. In a response designed to overshadow the programme, the Conservatives immediately complained to broadcasting regulator Ofcom and threatened to review its broadcasting licence.

It has been confirmed by the police that man was unarmed and restrained when he was shot. Which appears to be the case in the video.

It is now being reported that two of the (as yet unknown number of) victims have died of their wounds. No names or other information is currently available.

Another video – available here on the Mirror’s website – shows a man running away from the affray, carrying a knife. One can assume this was the knife used in the alleged attack. [If anyone can find a copy of this video anywhere, please let us know.]

The man in the video has already been dubbed the “hero”, for allegedly disarming the man. The video appears to show him removing a piece of evidence from a crime scene. Exactly why is not clear, one would hope it was returned to the police.

The lawyer for the London Bridge attacker has told the ABC he was shocked when he heard Usman Khan was responsible for the stabbing rampage, saying when he saw him last year he was convinced he was reformed.

Key points:

Khan sent a letter while in prison requesting he be placed in a deradicalisation program

Khan was released from prison last year

His lawyer said he believed not enough was done to reform his client

Solicitor Vajahat Sharif has questioned whether enough was done to "deradicalise" Khan during the eight years he spent in prison.

There was a time when a conviction of "terrorism" would mean a chopped head at the Tower of London on a bright day. With the death penalty being phased out as it should, terrorists need to be kept in jail for a much longer time or until they are "fully reformed like the Uyghurs in China". Anyone who thinks you can change the mind of people by simply explaining their wrongs ("deradicalise") are stupid and are as dangerous as terrorists — if this latest act of "stabbing rampage" was actually a real act of terrorism... Read above... Was Usman Khan set up?...

Boris Johnson on Saturday said that those convicted of the most serious terrorist offences should never be released from prison, as arguments over the blame for Friday’s London Bridge attack were thrust centre stage into the election campaign.

The prime minister reacted to the latest terrorist incident – in which three people died, including the assailant – by promising a package of hardline reforms which also included mandatory minimum 14-year sentences, an end to automatic early release for terrorist and extremism offences, and a new system under which those convicted will have to serve every day of sentences handed down by judges.

At the same time, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and the London mayor Sadiq Khan said urgent questions had to be asked about the Tory government’s record of imposing draconian austerity cuts to the prison services, while attempting a botched probation privatisation and failing to run an effective sentencing system.

On Saturday further details emerged about the knifeman, Usman Khan, and how he was subdued with a fire extinguisher and a narwhal tusk on London Bridge.

The convicted terrorist, who had been fitted with an electronic tag to track his movements after release from prison on licence last December, had been attending a prisoner rehabilitation conference at Fishmongers’ Hall. After threatening to blow up the building, he stabbed five people then moved to London Bridge where he was confronted by members of the public. One sprayed him with a fire extinguisher, while another pointed a 2m narwhal tusk taken from Fishmongers’ Hall by a Polish chef named Łukasz. Khan was tackled from behind and pinned down. Among those grappling with him were ex-prisoners attending the conference including James Ford, a convicted murderer.

Sources told the Observer that Khan attended a Whitehall conference earlier this year under escort. But he went to Friday’s conference unsupervised following discussions between police and probation officers.

Ignore the predictions of the unreliable and rigged opinion polls conducted primarily by organisations owned and controlled by right-wing Tory millionaires more intent on shaping opinions than reflecting them; this current General Election is very much in the balance.

A Jeremy Corbyn led government with SNP support for radical budgetary measures which significantly improve the quality of life and standard of living for millions across the UK is a very real possibility. The panic among the British ruling Establishment is tangible.

Several strategies were meant to guarantee Corbyn and his radical wealth redistribution policies were strangled at birth. The powerful mainstream media across the UK almost exclusively owned and controlled by six individual billionaires and their corporations would promote Johnson as the only viable PM, portray Corbyn as variously incompetent, dangerous, untrustworthy and anti-Semitic and ensure the election was primarily about Brexit in the hope Johnson’s ‘Get Brexit Done’ mantra would resonate among those who voted Leave in 2016.

The president views British politics almost as an extension of his own, domestic politics. He likewise goes after his “opponents” in Britain just as he does his opponents in the US. For Trump, UK politics is a “family matter.” While this fact may be inconvenient for Johnson in the short term, it could pay crucial, long-term dividends for the future of the US-UK alliance, otherwise known as the special relationship.

It may be true, as David Reynolds recently argued in the Wall Street Journal, that after Brexit, Britain will no longer play the same “transatlantic bridging role” between the US and continental Europe. But it does not follow, as Reynolds implies, that Brexit will “weaken the special relationship.” To the contrary, Trump and Johnson both sense the high potential of a post-Brexit world: a bilateral trade deal between America and Britain could form the cornerstone of an ever-closer alliance, enhancing existing security and military cooperation between the two nations.

The Europeans have been naive... Europe has been stalled by the "special" relationship of the UK with the USA. Every effort has been made by the USA to destroy Europe's ability to get ahead, through the UK being in the EU.

Sarkozy might have been a CIA agent also employed to facilitate the sting — like France rejoining NATO and destroying Libya.

It is Gus's unenlightened opinion that Europe will be much better without the UK and that 27 countries should be the maximum for the Union to work. Uncle Rupe wishes a Johnson wins which of course will lead to the dismantling of the "socialist" NHS — a great concept hated by "capitalists", the likes of Trump and Boris — and Uncle Rupe... Pity, the Brit people will endure the crap, but their government has been less than honest with Assange in prison, the Bank of London and other unsavoury fiddles such as spying on European leaders....

The UK should NEVER have been allowed in the EU. Scotland should secede.